The Gospel of God’s righteousness is necessary, because the human race has no righteousness of its own. This is proved of the whole race (i. 18-iii. 20), but in these verses (18-32) first of the heathen. The emphasis lies throughout on the fact that they have sinned against light. ,
ον, 18 f. The revelation of the tighteousness of God (ver. 17) is needed in view of the revelation of His wrath, from which only δικ. θεοῦ (whether it be His justifying sentence or the righteous- ness which He bestows on man) can deliver. ὀργὴ in the N.T. is usually
5092
t Neuter ἵπ των. N.T. here and in Acts only
/
ΜΑΙΟΥΣ i:
το. διότι τὸ ‘ γνωστὸν τοῦ Θεού Φανερόν ἐστιν ἐν αὐτοῖς : ὰ ρ 5: ὁ γὰρ
- ΄ Θεὸς αὐτοῖς ἐφανέρωσε' 20. τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα. αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ κτίσεως
ὦ αν / Ud 6 a Lid u atd > - , (11 times). κοσμου τοις ποιηµασι "οουµενα κα οραται, η TE τοιος αυτου δύναμις
u Only here
and Jude καὶ ᾿θειότης, eis τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀναπολογήτους. 21. διότι γνόντες
vers. 6, ‘
y Here only τὸν Θεόν, οὐχ ὡς Θεὸν ἐδόξασαν ἢ εὐχαρίστησαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐματαιώθησαν
πο νῦν ος
ws Cor, iii, ἐν τοῖς " διαλογισμοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐσκοτίσθη ἡ ἀσύνετος αὐτῶν καρδία :
40. Ν ας Cor.i a0. 22+ φάσκοντες εἶναι σοφοὶ * ἐμωράνθησαν, 23. καὶ ἤλλαξαν τὴν δόξαν τοῦ ἀφθάρτου Θεοῦ ἐν ὁμοιώματι εἰκόνος Φθαρτοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ
eschatological, but in 1 Thess. ii. 16 it refers to some historical judgment, and in John iii. 36 it is the condemnation of the sinner by God, with all that it involves, present and to come. The revelation of wrath here probably refers mainly to the final judgment: the primary character of Jesus in Paul’s Gospel being 6 ῥνόμενος ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ὀργῆς τῆς ἐρχομένης, I Thess. i. 10, Rom. v. 9; but it is not forcing it here to make it include God’s condemnation uttered in conscience, and attested (ver. 24) in the judicial abandonment of the world. The revelation of the righteous- ness of God has to match this situation, and reverse it. ἀσέβεια is “ positive and active irreligion”: see Trench, Syz., § Ixvi. τῶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἐν ἀδικίᾳ κατεχόντων may mean (1) who possess the truth, yet live in unrighteousness ; or (2) who suppress the truth by, or in, an unrighteous life. Inthe N.T. ἀλήθεια is moral rather than speculative; it is truth of a sort which is held only as it is acted on: cf. the Johannine expression ποιεῖν τὴν ἀλήθεαν. Hence the latter sense is to be preferred (see Wendt, Lehre $esu, ΠΠ., S. 203 Anm.). διότι τὸ γνωστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ κ.τ.λ. There is no indisputable way of deciding whether γνωστὸν here means ‘“‘ known” (the usual N.T. sense) or ‘‘ knowable” (the usual classic sense). Cremer (who compares Phil. iii. 8 τὸ ὑπερέχον τῆς γνώσεως, Heb. vi. 17 τὸ ἀμετάθετον τῆς βουλῆς, Rom. ii. 4 τὸ χρηστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, and makes τοῦ θεοῦ in the passage before us also gen. poss.) favours the latter. What is meant in either case is the knowledge of God which is independent of such a special revelation as had been given to the Jews. Under this come (ver. 20) His eternal power, and in a word His (eternal) divinity, things in- accessible indeed to sense (ἀόρατα), but clear to intelligence (voovpeva), ever since Creation (ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου: for ἀπὸ thus used, see Winer, 463),
by the things that are made. God’s power, and the totality of the Divine
-attributes constituting the Divine nature,
are inevitably impressed on the mind by nature (or, to use the scripture word, by creation). There is that within man which so catches the meaning of all that is without as to issue in an in- stinctive knowledge of God. (See the magnificent illustration of this in Illing- worth’s Divine Immanence, chap. ii., on The religious influence of the material world.) This knowledge involves duties, and men are without excuse because, when in possession of it, they did not perform these duties; that is, did not glorify as God the God whom they thus knew.